patrick.net

My main point is that we need health care reform to stop the medical costs of your inevitable illnesses from bankrupting you. I'm not sure exactly what that reform should be, and I'm not about to uncritically accept everything Obama proposes, but I am sure that everything Obama proposes will be dismissed by you.

The good news is that you're not just on Fox and wnd.com all day, so you get a chance to converse with real humans with a variety of opinions, not just sit there and get the hate burned into your brain in a one-way operation.

Mr T that I was chatting with is a pretty smart guy about human nature, and I think his analysis is right.

Everything Obama proposes will be dismissed by me. Why? Because he is a moron, just like George W Bush before him.

Obama does not understand capitalism. Until he does there is little chance of him proposing sensible health care reform. Here are ideas that make sense:
http://mises.org/story/3643

> Hi T,
> what do you think it would take to get right-wing Republicans to support Obama’s health care reform effort?
>
> Why are they so determined to believe Obama was not born in the US? Is it mostly that they are sore losers?
>

1. No all right-wingers are Republicans.
The reason I do not like Obama's health care reform is simple: I would like to see health INSURANCE reform rather than health CARE reform. Obama is on the record that he wants a single payer system, this is just the first step towards that goal. The last thing we need is more government spending and piling on an already enormous national debt.
I do not trust politicians (who would remain on a separate health care plan), to create rules that would result in a government run health care program for the rest of us.

2. Sore losers!? How about the following reason: The rule of LAW.
Without the rule of law - USA is no different than a third world banana republic. Do we want disputes to be resolved on the street?
When there are legitimate questions about candidates eligibility to serve, the evidence should be examined by the courts, not friendly web sites.
How can we trust Obama to implement so many radical changes in the society when he is not willing to obide by the current laws?
As someone who grew up in a communist country - I find it very disturbing to hear and see the same doublespeak from political leaders in my new country as in the old one. On papar we are all equal, yet the ruling elite is allowed to bend the rules whenever they want.
I had enough communism/socialism in my life, it is like deja vu. I have seen the same types of attacks and media prosecutions of people who dared to have a different opinion. It is sad to see the same thing in the USA.
The question of Obama's birthplace is very simple. He should embrace the opportunity to prove his eligibility in court. Let the court examine the evidence (allow CSPAN to broadcast it, for everyone to see that the hearing is fair and unbiased). It could be done in one day and then country could move forward and debate other important issues.
In my opinion this is THE MOST IMPORTANT issue for USA at this moment. I have witnessed a breakup of a country/society (Yugoslavia), civil war and many dead because of the ego of a single leader. Leaders must not be above the law.

Why would an intelligent politican like Obama allow a side issue to cloud the debate on a program he wishes to implement so much? If you, as his supporter, care so much about health care reform - you should ask Obama to close the eligibility issue. Do not just dismiss his critics: neither of us has seen the evidence first hand.
Life experience tought me to be very suspicios of politicans who use media proxies to destroy their political opponents. Either you have enough arguments to win the debate based on facts or you don't. The debate should be civil and based on facts/evidence.

Tenpoundbass says

anyone catch Politically incorrect this week with Bill Maher?
He and his panel gets it, why doesn’t the Liberals on this board get it?

He’s finally out of Love with Obama, and has moved past protecting him no matter what because he is Democrat. Finally he’s seeing it for what it is.
Bill stated that Obama has failed, as Bill Clinton failed, because of their cryptic definitions and verbiage of what exactly it is that they are trying to do. Both failed to out line what “PEOPLE” actually want to see in print in the plans. While producing thousands of pages of administration fluff, that doesn’t detail Jack Squat.
Come on Patrick and T, you don’t have to be a Republican to be smart enough to see “Bull Shit” when you see it.

why im sure im seeing livertarian bullshit in your post.

sorry pat, can only stomach so much cowpie whining from TPB who does it incessantly.

"The question of Obama’s birthplace is very simple. He should embrace the opportunity to prove his eligibility in court. Let the court examine the evidence (allow CSPAN to broadcast it, for everyone to see that the hearing is fair and unbiased). It could be done in one day and then country could move forward and debate other important issues."

what a load of crap.
birthers=deathers=side issues=distortion.
you channel palin quite well, tho.
rof.

waterbaby says

“The question of Obama’s birthplace is very simple. He should embrace the opportunity to prove his eligibility in court. Let the court examine the evidence (allow CSPAN to broadcast it, for everyone to see that the hearing is fair and unbiased). It could be done in one day and then country could move forward and debate other important issues.”
what a load of crap.
birthers=deathers=side issues=distortion.
you channel palin quite well, tho.
rof.

Obama chose it to be a distraction. He could order a release of the original long form birth certificate today. He could ask the Kapiolani hospital in Hawaii to release his birth records as well. Let the Court examine the evidence. By the time he comes back from vacation, the whole issue could be already resolved.

Usually those who do not speak the truth go to extraordinary measures to obfuscate the issue.
If Obama was telling the truth, there would be no need for secrecy. There would be no "birthers".

The next sensible silent republican group will be the employers of this country when they decide to stop paying for their employees full coverage health insurance. It's voluntary and costing them up to $14,000 per year per employee. A sensible alternative will be a major medical health plan that only covers 100% of accident and maternity expenses, but only costs 1/10th the price. The employees will have to accept it if they want to keep their jobs, or pay the difference for full coverage.

Let's dispense with the whole concept of taking sides. Republicans and Democrats are lining up like musketeers on either side of this issue. The real solution is in the middle being trampled by all the partisan bickering. No wonder we can't get anything done! I don't want to read this sensible silent crap because that just means you're content to let the animals in the party get away with whatever they want. Penalize them by changing your affiliation. Part of the problem is that we cherry pick things either side wants and wind up with a bill that's one half right-wing and one half left-wing. That's not centered because it constantly tugs at itself either way.

Now I don't comment here often, but one thing that I haven't seen anyone talk about is the ridiculous way medical institutions bill for procedures. Go visit the hospital once and then examine the bill. You'll get charged for getting an IV by the nurse who actually stuck it in there, by the doctor who signed off that the IV was inserted correctly but didn't actually do anything, by the hospital itself because you used one of their IV's, by the manufacturer of the IV, by the machine owner that the IV was hooked up to, and so on. Take a close look at all these multiple billings for the same thing. No wonder health care is so expensive. We allow these shenanigans to go on everywhere, not just with IV's. Do all medical entities do this? No, but I've seen it many times. They do this because they can get away with it or they need the money for some other reason.

If you want real health care reform then that issue needs to be addressed. We also need to look at tort reform. People have been complaining for years that health care is too expensive, but the people with the power to reform things are looking for the quick fix with a public option. Nobody is talking about why things are so expensive. Nobody is talking about what contributes to health care being so expensive. I just hear that it's expensive and needs to be fixed. A solution has been devised in the absence of understanding about what the symptoms mean.

Finally, on the subject of birthers, the law is very clear. By the letter of law, McCain should have been disqualified despite being affirmed by Congress in an interpretation. Nobody knows for sure about Obama yet. There's not much more than that to say. The law is what it is. Even if Obama was born elsewhere, I'm sure someone will interpret natural born citizen to mean something like child of the world.

"the ridiculous way medical institutions bill for procedures. Go visit the hospital once and then examine the bill. You’ll get charged for getting an IV by the nurse who actually stuck it in there, by the doctor who signed off that the IV was inserted correctly but didn’t actually do anything, by the hospital itself because you used one of their IV’s, by the manufacturer of the IV, by the machine owner that the IV was hooked up to, and so on. Take a close look at all these multiple billings for the same thing. No wonder health care is so expensive."
---------------------------------------------------
those $40 box of tissues.
patients do not do this, they dont bill or over charge.
the costs are outrageous....$240 for one nausea pill.
a script overseas costs $10 while here it can cost $150, for the same thing.
"There would be no “birthers”."
his birth cert has been shown, verified by the state of hawaii.
guess 'deathers' havent seen that, eh...
have you seen the palin 'baby' birth cert, yet?
rof....

BigDragon says

Now I don’t comment here often, but one thing that I haven’t seen anyone talk about is the ridiculous way medical institutions bill for procedures. Go visit the hospital once and then examine the bill. You’ll get charged for getting an IV by the nurse who actually stuck it in there, by the doctor who signed off that the IV was inserted correctly but didn’t actually do anything, by the hospital itself because you used one of their IV’s, by the manufacturer of the IV, by the machine owner that the IV was hooked up to, and so on. Take a close look at all these multiple billings for the same thing. No wonder health care is so expensive. We allow these shenanigans to go on everywhere, not just with IV’s. Do all medical entities do this? No, but I’ve seen it many times. They do this because they can get away with it or they need the money for some other reason.

Historically, hospital billing actually used to be much simpler and based on a per diem rate. The reason that the system had to morph into what you see today is that there needed to be a detailed way to track specificity of ailments. Also, some hospitals could easily skimp on capital expenditures and would be reimbursed the same as hospitals that hadn't. For instance, you would have a regional hospital getting paid the same for standard procedure as an urban hospital with highly complex patients with co-morbidities and the latest in medical technology needed to best care for the patient.

The issue today is more around the fact that the "bill" you get from the hospital is completely bogus. The "prices" listed for services are not real prices at all, but are subsequently negotiated with private insurers and the government to a lower rate. This system removes all transparency from pricing in the market and happens not only with hospitals but with payment for all medical services (MD visits, drugs, devices, hospitals, etc.). In the end, an uninsured person would in theory be billed for the list "price" that isn't a real price at all.

waterbaby says

““There would be no “birthers”.”
his birth cert has been shown, verified by the state of hawaii.
guess ‘deathers’ havent seen that, eh…
have you seen the palin ‘baby’ birth cert, yet?
rof….

A detailed explanation for your question can be found in my posts on the "Birthers" tread on this Forum. To summarize for you: Document posted on Obama friendly website is Certification Of Live Birth (COLB) and it was commonly issued in the past for children of Hawaiian residents who were born abroad. It is not the original birth certificate. The link showing the original Hawaiian birth certificate from 1961 is also shown in one of the postings on the other thread. No such document has been published by Obama.
The claim that the State of Hawaii has certified anything is laughable. It boils down to one statement from a state official who in the past issued very ambiguous statements. How do we know that she is telling the truth? The only way to be certain is to allow court to examine the evidence.
What is your theory of Obama's unwillingness to let courts verify his eligibility? What is he afraid off?
Palin and her children have nothing to do with this issue. At this point there is no need to look at the birth certificate for Palin's child. If her child becomes a presidential nominee, then we should ask to see the original birth certificate.

"nosf41"

yawn.
your palin birther bullshit is boring.
..shes twittin ya!

rof

waterbaby says

nosf41
yawn.
your palin birther bullshit is boring.
..shes twittin ya!
rof

As usual you have no arguments in this debate. I could care less for the juvenile attempts to insult me. It just shows your character. Does your attack come from the fear that "birthers" could be right on this issue?
I cannot seriously consider any proposals from Obama when he is so secretive about his own past. Why would he be more forthcoming about his plans for transforming health care, immigration laws, cap and trade legislation, national security force...
Have you ever experienced the situation where politicans you trusted lied about their intentions and created a mess? If not - this is your opportunity.

"Have you ever experienced the situation where politicans you trusted lied about their intentions and created a mess?"

like...oh...iraq?

some pretty weak wind, there pal.

moke says

Everything Obama proposes will be dismissed by me. Why? Because he is a moron, just like George W Bush before him.
Obama does not understand capitalism. Until he does there is little chance of him proposing sensible health care reform. Here are ideas that make sense:

http://mises.org/story/3643

from the article:

"Eliminate all licensing requirements for medical schools, hospitals, pharmacies, and medical doctors and other health-care personnel. Their supply would almost instantly increase, prices would fall, and a greater variety of health-care services would appear on the market.

Competing voluntary accreditation agencies would take the place of compulsory government licensing — if health-care providers believe that such accreditation would enhance their own reputation, and that their consumers care about reputation, and are willing to pay for it."

...while conveniently leaving out an enforcement mechanism for these "voluntary accreditation agencies". The penalty for practicing medicine without a license today is jail time. When some quack gives bogus medication to a patient in one state, what's stopping him from moving elsewhere and peddling the same garbage? His reputation isn't going to follow him. He can lie and say he's accredited by some agency (which would have the exact same role as the current medical boards anyway, anyway), and there's nothing to stop him.

"Eliminate all government restrictions on the production and sale of pharmaceutical products and medical devices. This means no more Food and Drug Administration, which presently hinders innovation and increases costs."

...and no mention about eliminating pharmaceutical patents. I wonder why? Patents are a form of artificial monopoly.

It's also interesting that they ignore all the problems that the food and medicine supply had before the FDA existed (hell, we have enough bullshit woo-woo like homeopathy and the like as is). Why, of course it's MY fault if I don't just know that my baby food has formaldehyde in it! Maybe I should have listened to my neighbor who fed her baby the formaldehyde-filled baby food and she could have told me how bad it was. Duh!

"Eliminate all subsidies to the sick or unhealthy. Subsidies create more of whatever is being subsidized. Subsidies for the ill and diseased promote carelessness, indigence, and dependency. If we eliminate such subsidies, we would strengthen the will to live healthy lives and to work for a living. In the first instance, that means abolishing Medicare and Medicaid."

Yeah man, I can't wait to be old and sickly so that I can take advantage of that government gravy train. If only I had the WILL to live a healthy life when I'm 65+. I'll just will those tumors out of my body and will cellular degeneration into submission.

Your stance is that Obama is a "moron" because he doesn't "understand" capitalism, where you define "understand" as "agrees with economic theories that have never been put into practice and have nothing but data models and anecdotal data to back it up". That's the same kind of bullshit woo-woo as Marx was peddling. "B-b-but", you say, "the won't even TRY it!". Of course they won't, dipshit. Economic theories are little more than masturbatory fantasies. If the anarcho-capitalists got their way it would be the same basic problem as socialist states have faced, only instead of government fucking the people, unregulated businesses would fuck the people.

It's so incredibly easy to propose "solutions" that you know damned well have no chance in hell of being implemented and then point the finger back at the people trying to make the best of the heaping pile that we have and say "see, I told ya so!"

waterbaby says

“Have you ever experienced the situation where politicans you trusted lied about their intentions and created a mess?”
like…oh…iraq?
some pretty weak wind, there pal.

I do not understant this "weak wind" comment.
Are you saying that we should not learn from the Iraq war example? Should we follow the new administration blindly without any questioning?

Kevin says

moke says

Everything Obama proposes will be dismissed by me. Why? Because he is a moron, just like George W Bush before him.
Obama does not understand capitalism. Until he does there is little chance of him proposing sensible health care reform. Here are ideas that make sense:
http://mises.org/story/3643

from the article:

Your stance is that Obama is a “moron” because he doesn’t “understand” capitalism, where you define “understand” as “agrees with economic theories that have never been put into practice and have nothing but data models and anecdotal data to back it up”. That’s the same kind of bullshit woo-woo as Marx was peddling. “B-b-but”, you say, “the won’t even TRY it!”. Of course they won’t, dipshit. Economic theories are little more than masturbatory fantasies. If the anarcho-capitalists got their way it would be the same basic problem as socialist states have faced, only instead of government fucking the people, unregulated businesses would fuck the people.
It’s so incredibly easy to propose “solutions” that you know damned well have no chance in hell of being implemented and then point the finger back at the people trying to make the best of the heaping pile that we have and say “see, I told ya so!”

The solution to helth care costs is probably somewhere in the middle of these two opposites. We need increased compettion and price sensitivity to health care services.
If you look at the non-insured procedures like cosmetic surgeries and eye lasik surgeries, the costs have gone down in the last few years because of the increased competition. In addition, patient pay out of their own pockets - and doctors cannot simply charge more than market is willing to pay.
The problem with health care insurance is that we have no idea how much will certain procedure cost - and for most part we do not care because somebody else is paying for it. Add huge malpractice insurance premiums, high educational costs for doctors, an army of illegal aliens - the result is predictable.
I believe that majority of these issues could be addressed without government takeover of the health care system. There should be a regulatory framework to prevent abuses in the system and encourage competition and transparency in health care costs.

nosf41 says

If you look at the non-insured procedures like cosmetic surgeries and eye lasik surgeries, the costs have gone down in the last few years because of the increased competition. In addition, patient pay out of their own pockets - and doctors cannot simply charge more than market is willing to pay.

This applies for some procedures, but the vast majority of time spent with medical professionals for most people are going to be:

1. Regular check ups (for which insurance makes no sense, but should also be very inexpensive)
2. Emergency visits (for which it would be impossible to have competition)

There are definitely some procedures that are "voluntary" (in the sense that you get to choose when they happen), but that's rare. You definitely won't be in a position to negotiate when you're in a car accident, go into labor, or have heart attack.

There are some aspects of the modern economy that can't really have competition, and emergency medical care is one of them. Another is public utilities. Do you really want 10 different power grids running through your city?

nosf41 says

The problem with health care insurance is that we have no idea how much will certain procedure cost - and for most part we do not care because somebody else is paying for it. Add huge malpractice insurance premiums, high educational costs for doctors, an army of illegal aliens - the result is predictable.

Why do you keep repeating these falsehoods after being debunked again and again? I'll go ahead and grant the cost for doctors, but malpractice and illegal aliens are provably insignificant portions of our medical expenses.

“Eliminate all licensing requirements for medical schools, hospitals, pharmacies, and medical doctors and other health-care personnel. Their supply would almost instantly increase, prices would fall, and a greater variety of health-care services would appear on the market.

Competing voluntary accreditation agencies would take the place of compulsory government licensing — if health-care providers believe that such accreditation would enhance their own reputation, and that their consumers care about reputation, and are willing to pay for it.”

Hey there are places that have ended licensing requirements for professionals. They also let business self regulate. Zimbabwe, Nigeria, and Somalia come to mind. Anybody know how things working out for them health care wise?

What the article manages to overlook is that there is no shortage of doctors in the US. There is a severe maldistribution both geographically and by specialty, not a shortage. When foreign docs come to practice in the US they also tend to choose the same locations and specialties that are overcrowded already. Believe it or not a lot more doctors want to live in Manhattan NY than Manhattan Kansas. So the free market solution would be to have some government agency tell doctors where and what they can practice?

Another fly in this simplistic solution is the unfortunate fact that the highest cost per capita for medical care is in the areas with the highest number of doctors per capita. Should we continue to increase the supply in those area's to further drive down the costs? It's worked so well already.

Medical schools and residencies both have voluntary accreditation already, not licensing. See the AAMC and ACGME websites for more information. As Mark Twain once said "It is better to remain silent and appear to be a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt".

Yet another issue is the fact (I really hate when facts screw up a good demagogue's argument) that the supply of medical school grads is limited by the amount of money the states and federal government are willing to throw into medical education. You didn't realize almost all medical education is subsidized (pretty much everywhere around the world)? Oh my now that's a problem. We will have to cut out that government subsidy stuff right now!! So the first thing that happens in our search of ideological purity is to eliminate roughly 80% medical school grads. Now we're making progress on instantly increasing supply. Although I am a little mystified on how you "instantly" increase supply of people who have to go through 4 years of medical school and 3-7 years of residency training. After we eliminate that awful licensing stuff where people actually have to prove they know what they are doing (although I am pretty sure that knowing the difference between the stomach and liver is a much overrated skill anyway) they will perhaps be able to absorb all this training overnight somehow?

Who accredits the accrediting agencies? This would be like the NAR accredited realtors maybe? That's certainly worked out well.

There are no easy solutions. The cost problems of the US healthcare system are deep and very mutifaceted. Anyone that says the solution lies in a couple simple steps is just a fool.

Obama's plan is not a solution. It does nothing to tackle the cost side. The plan may help by getting uninsured people insured, which means they will seek care in doctor's offices while mildly sick, instead of in very expensive er's after getting very sick. Maybe. Maybe not. Obama should have gotten the plan completely together first, then explained the nuts and bolts of how it would work.

bob2356 says

Obama’s plan is not a solution. It does nothing to tackle the cost side. The plan may help by getting uninsured people insured, which means they will seek care in doctor’s offices while mildly sick, instead of in very expensive er’s after getting very sick. Maybe. Maybe not. Obama should have gotten the plan completely together first, then explained the nuts and bolts of how it would work.

That's not entirely accurate. Putting insurers out of business would certainly lower costs, as would curtailing medicare waste (though now the Republicans are rallying to save this waste for some reason)

Kevin makes a lot of sense. I agree, eliminating medicare/medicaid and insurance would solve all the problems with health care. The health care industry needs some competion for your interest. Under the current system (and Obama's), there is no competition for quality heath care, and I certainly don't envy what they do to their patients.

Everybody thinks that health reform is going to depend on the insurance industry or the drug industry submitting to the public will. But they never mention how basic costs are a function of the way the medical industry proceeds with disease... and how corrupt the AMA and other doctor's lobbying groups has effectively blocked changes for many decades. In fact, the AMA blocked socialized medicine since the 1960's.

In fact the entire medical system for the most part is working against the patients best interests in many cases (not individually, but as a Borg-like whole). From the top of the pyramid on down, everyone including nurses, techs, orderlies, hospital admins, are in it for the (often large) payday and pay check which never stops. They do not want to change the system and are content to pass the buck onto society (medicare, the ins. companies).

Doctors in the U.S. make more money than in other countries where there is socialized medicine. That is why people from all over the world study in the U.S. and want to practice here. Obviously these superstars do not want to give that lifestyle up, just as those practicing investment banking do not want to change their high-risk ways, because for so many years they have achieved spectacular success.

Ever wonder why doctors do not discuss or recommend alternative therapies such as medical cannabis in place of opoids (and fought tooth and nail to keep it illegal ), meditation in place of SSRIs, and stress reduction and other lifestyle changes which would many patients' chronic symptoms? Because it goes against their orthodoxy which has remained the same since the early 1900's -- in that I am the high-paid healer priest and you are the helpless patient. It would be like Catholic priests telling the parishioners to read the Bible and figure out how to wash away a Sin. Doctors see themselves as priestly and do not like anyone challenging their monopoly on Life any more than Goldman Sachs bankers wants to be told they can't make up new derivatives.

These doctors fail to see that they are the root cause, and that their hospital bureaucracies are enablers. The insurance companies are trying to stay in business and make money, but really they are only reacting to something they can't control.

The health debate irritates me because it seems these key people have been left out of the firing line.

Kevin says

There are some aspects of the modern economy that can’t really have competition, and emergency medical care is one of them. Another is public utilities. Do you really want 10 different power grids running through your city?

This may not be the best example for comparison. In many parts of the country customers can chose their power provider. There are regulations that open access to power lines to many suppliers. There is no need to have multiple grids to have a competition for power supply. Big power companies from the past have been forced to chose the area they want to compete in. They are now either distribution companies or power generation companies.

Kevin says

Why do you keep repeating these falsehoods after being debunked again and again? I’ll go ahead and grant the cost for doctors, but malpractice and illegal aliens are provably insignificant portions of our medical expenses.

This is your opinion, we may not agree on how severe the problem is. There are many news articles about Emergency Rooms closures (particularly in Southern California). The main reason is that those hospitals cannot afford to provide care for illegals and not be reimbursed for the service. When something causes multiple emergency room closures, I would not classify it as an insignifficant cost in the health care debate.
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jan/28/local/me-erdoctors28

nosf41 says

This may not be the best example for comparison. In many parts of the country customers can chose their power provider. There are regulations that open access to power lines to many suppliers. There is no need to have multiple grids to have a competition for power supply. Big power companies from the past have been forced to chose the area they want to compete in. They are now either distribution companies or power generation companies.

Either way, not exactly a "free market". Companies kind of compete on generation (though due to the nature of the way that power grids work, they aren't really 'competing' on efficiency or normal merits), but they're all forced to use the same heavily regulated infrastructure.

A better example might be sewers though. I can't think of any place I've ever lived where you had a choice in sewage service.

nosf41 says

This is your opinion, we may not agree on how severe the problem is. There are many news articles about Emergency Rooms closures (particularly in Southern California). The main reason is that those hospitals cannot afford to provide care for illegals and not be reimbursed for the service. When something causes multiple emergency room closures, I would not classify it as an insignifficant cost in the health care debate.

It's not an opinion -- it's a fact that neither malpractice (suits, insurance, settlements, or anything related to it), nor illegal immigrants are a meaningful factor in the cost of medical care in the United States.

There are absolutely anecdotal cases of illegal immigration causing some issues, and even lawsuits closing down individual clinics, but as a whole the effect is meaningless. If you removed every malpractice suit and every illegal immigrant, we would still have a horribly expensive, shitty medical system.

Lastly, your attempting to link emergency room closures in california with illegal immigration is weak at best. The problem is poverty, not illegal immigration. Get rid of the illegals and you still have a massive poverty problems. Do you really believe that 3 million people out of a population of 37 million is going to have anywhere near the impact of a 12% unemployment rate and a 20% poverty rate?

Illegal immigrant scapegoating seems to be a popular pastime during difficult economic times. It's another one of those issues that you know damned well you can't do anything about (except maybe un-fucking mexico's government), but it's popular to bitch about.

"Ever wonder why doctors do not discuss or recommend alternative therapies such as medical cannabis in place of opoids (and fought tooth and nail to keep it illegal )"

Maybe because the DEA doesn't allow prescriptions of medical cannibis and any doctor prescribing it will lose their license. Big incentive. Ca,Ri,Nm, and Co get around this by allowing doctors to recommend as opposed to prescribe, but this is pretty shaky legal ground where most doctors are unwilling to go. Especially during the Bush administration. The DEA, FDA, Justice Department, and the legal/law enforcement establishment are the ones fighting tooth and nail. Considering how much money goes to the war on drugs this is not surprising.

You don't know what you are talking about. The AMA doesn't oppose medical cannabis. The official position is they would like to see results of controlled, peer reviewed studies before making a recommendation. This is the major paper on the subject from 2001 http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/no-index/about-ama/13625.shtml. Since doctors are the ones who will be sued if anything goes wrong and there is not a peer reviewed study to back them up this is a sensible position. Who says fear malpractice lawsuits doesn't add to the cost of medicine at every level? No one can even begin to calculate how much defensive medicine adds to the cost of health care. Both the Medical Students Society of the AMA and American College of Physicians have recently adopted resolutions calling for rescheduling medical cannabis allowing it to be available for prescription. That is hardly fighting tooth and nail.

It's opioids (the synthetics) and opiates (opium containing) by the way. FYI opiates/opoids and medical cannabis wouldn't be used to treat the same conditions anyway.

"Doctors in the U.S. make more money than in other countries where there is socialized medicine."

They also work a lot more hours. That also doesn't include what doctors in the public systems can make doing private practice. Doctors overseas who wish do private practice can make as much as US physicians if they want to work that hard. Most don't and are very glad to have the option. Of course doctors in socialized medicine countries don't have to pay 100,000 malpractice insurance every year or 300,000 in student loans either.

"The insurance companies are trying to stay in business and make money, but really they are only reacting to something they can’t control."

It's nice to know the insurance companies are benevolent Santa Claus like organizations committed to the public good and supporting girl scouts. They would certainly never lobby congress for laws that stifle competition or raise the cost of health care. You are aware that the insurance companies set the reimbursement rates for doctors aren't you?

Doctors are far from blameless in the cost of health care. Read this article http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/06/01/090601fa_fact_gawande from the New Yorker for some good insight. But to claim insurance companies are helpless pawns of the AMA is so far beyond absurd that I have to assume this is satire.

Hey Birthers - Do you understand that Obama has to go through a massive background check by the FBI? Do you think that they would miss something like his birth records? Give me a break you morons!

campkel says

Hey Birthers - Do you understand that Obama has to go through a massive background check by the FBI? Do you think that they would miss something like his birth records? Give me a break you morons!

Really? Do you have any proof? Were those the same investigators who claimed that Iraq's possesion of WMDs was a slam dunk?
If you were right, it would have been trivial for Obama to address the eligibility lawsuits by submitting the evidence of being a natural-born citizen and let the court decide. Instead, he spent more than a 1M$ on lawyers who are trying to dismiss the eligibility lawsuits. What is your explanation for his behavior?
Keep in mind that this is the same Obama who used courts in 1996 to clear the field of his opponents in the primary elections for Illinois State Senate. He did it just few days before elections when his opponents did not have enough time to submit additional petitions to qualify to be on the ballot. He run unopposed in a heavily Democratic district - that is how he won his first public office.
It is interesting that courts could make a quick decision at that time, verify personal information for hundreds of voters, yet it is taking already more than a year (with no end in sight) to verify whether a single person (Obama) was indeed born in USA.
Before you start asking more questions, look at the "Birthers" thread, there is a chance that I have already answered your question.
If not, keep the civil tone and we can debate the issue. Usually those who have no arguments in a debate use foul language and ridicule the other side. I am sure you can articulate your opinion without dragging a discussion into a gutter.

nosf41 says

Really? Do you have any proof? Were those the same investigators who claimed that Iraq’s possesion of WMDs was a slam dunk?

No, the FBI and the CIA are completely separate entities. Again, I ask -- have you ever even been inside of the United States?

Kevin says

nosf41 says

Really? Do you have any proof? Were those the same investigators who claimed that Iraq’s possesion of WMDs was a slam dunk?

No, the FBI and the CIA are completely separate entities. Again, I ask — have you ever even been inside of the United States?

Yes, I have been resident/citizen of USA since 1995, and I know the difference between the two agencies.
I hope you'll give me some slack when it comes to writing; English is my second language. It is amusing to see that you are only interested in dealing with side issues (playing "gotcha games"). I tried to make a point that a government agency made strong claims that ended up being totally discredited.

Let me try to formulate my question a bit more precise and less metaphorical:
"Were those the same kind of investigators who claimed that Iraq’s possession of WMDs was a slam dunk?"

or even better one:
Was it the same FBI that had Zacarias Moussaoui in custody for almost one month prior to 9/11/2001 and could not even examine his laptop let alone conduct any effective investigation.

I am sure that there were some lower level agents eager to do the Obama background investigation. Would they have been allowed to do so by their superiors?

I can use my imagination to speculate all kinds of things related to FBI - yet it means nothing in the eligibility debate. The only tangible evidence we have so far is Obama's behavior, which is very unusual for a person claiming to be a natural-born citizen.

nosf41 says

Were those the same kind of investigators who claimed that Iraq’s possession of WMDs was a slam dunk?

And, again, I say "No, the FBI and the CIA are completely separate entities". If you don't understand the difference between the roles these groups play, the power structure, the political history (particularly why Bush took domestic counter terrorism responsibilities way from the FBI and created the DHS), you have no room to speak on the issue whatsoever.

And I'll also say "you have no idea what you're talking about".

Sorry, my point went above your head.
You focus on only one sentence of my answer. Whast happened to the second question about FBI?

In this discussion the agency (CIA vs. FBI) makes no difference. It is not the point of this discussion.
You can ony SPECULATE that there was an eligiblity investigation. I can equally SPECULATE that there was no investigation (by any agency). Neither of us has first hand knowledge about it.
Obama's behavior gives my theory more credibility - why would somone continue to fight eligibility lawsuits?
It makes no sense. If the document posed on the FactCheck.org site had any LEGAL weight - Obama would have sent it to the court - not a friendy web site.

I really hope that birthers are just plain old fashioned racists, not people who actually believe this stuff.

Besides birthers are just helpless pawns being manipulated by larger forces, the uberbirthers. Uberbirthers are of course aliens who while time traveling spotted 2008 as an ideal time for a cosmic intergalactic practical joke. First they went back in time to the constitutional convention to make sure that the founding fathers didn't actually define the term "Natural Born Citizen". Then racing back to the 1950's they implanted an alien fetus into the belly of a 17 year white college student married to a black kenyan all the while knowing that this baby would eventually become president of the united states, therefore driving all the right wingnuts to apoplexy. They then cleverly arranged for the couple to secretly fly to Kenya without leaving any written records of the flight so their son would actually be a british citizen (how the hell could a couple of college students afford plane tickets to Kenya at 1950's air travel prices anyway?) in order to further frustrate the birthers . Then the uberbirthers cleverly placed articles in the local newspapers and official documents in the states (yes you idiots Hawaii was a state for 2 years already when Obama was born) archives to cover up for this. See. it's all very simple.

nosf41 says

Obama’s behavior gives my theory more credibility - why would somone continue to fight eligibility lawsuits?

Nothing gives your theory any credibility. The world is laughing at you, and those of us who have the misfortune of sharing society with you are just hoping that you don't pull a von brunn.

bob2356 says

I really hope that birthers are just plain old fashioned racists, not people who actually believe this stuff.
Besides birthers are just helpless pawns being manipulated by larger forces, the uberbirthers. Uberbirthers are of course aliens who while time traveling spotted 2008 as an ideal time for a cosmic intergalactic practical joke. First they went back in time to the constitutional convention to make sure that the founding fathers didn’t actually define the term “Natural Born Citizen”. Then racing back to the 1950’s they implanted an alien fetus into the belly of a 17 year white college student married to a black kenyan all the while knowing that this baby would eventually become president of the united states, therefore driving all the right wingnuts to apoplexy. They then cleverly arranged for the couple to secretly fly to Kenya without leaving any written records of the flight so their son would actually be a british citizen (how the hell could a couple of college students afford plane tickets to Kenya at 1950’s air travel prices anyway?) in order to further frustrate the birthers . Then the uberbirthers cleverly placed articles in the local newspapers and official documents in the states (yes you idiots Hawaii was a state for 2 years already when Obama was born) archives to cover up for this. See. it’s all very simple.

I have already answered many of your questions in my posts on either this one or on the "Birthers" thread.
If you had a logical explanation for Obama's secrecy about his past, you would not need to resort to rants and ridiculing "birthers". The eligibility lawsuits are simple to resolve - Obama should release the original birth certificate and ask the Kapiolani Hospital to open the records for August 4, 1961.
Tell me what is irrational with this request? You actually have to be irrational to continue supporting Obama on this issue. You cannot explain how is it possible that Obama's kindergarthen records have been lost, his elementary and high school records (in Hawaii) have been sealed. The same is true for his college records (Occidental College, Columbia University and Harward Law School). It would be interesting to see whether he registered as a US citizen or foreigner. The only available document from his school years was registration at the elementary school in Indonesia where Obama (aka Barry Soetoro) was listed as an Indonesian citizen.
Other presidential candidates in the past were not as secretive as Obama when it came to ordinary documents like birth certificate or college records. Why is Obama an exception?
My doubts are not based on any conspiracy theory - just on observation of his behavior, and some rational thinking.

Why should anyone open their records. The state of Hawaii certified it. If this was not within the states normal procedures there would have been lawsuits all over. AP and CNN sent reporters to Indonesia and had no trouble seeing the schools or talking to teachers or former classmates. http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/22/obama.madrassa/

Oh right, CNN and AP are also part of the grand Obama conspiracy. I forgot.

What do you mean his records are sealed? No one's school records are public information. Call up Harvard and ask for Bush's records. I'm sure they will sent them right out to you. I don't see where Obama is any more secretive than anyone else. I really don't remember any past president posting his college records or birth certificate to the press. Please tell me which ones did. Actually could you scan them and post them here, I would be very interested in seeing that.

It wasn't a rant, it was satire, look up what that means. Get a life.

Kevin says

nosf41 says

Obama’s behavior gives my theory more credibility - why would somone continue to fight eligibility lawsuits?

Nothing gives your theory any credibility. The world is laughing at you, and those of us who have the misfortune of sharing society with you are just hoping that you don’t pull a von brunn.

The only thing you could come up with was a baseless personal attack!
Don't be angry at me - ask Obama and his advisors to put this nonsense to an end by answering the questions in the proper forum - court.
It just shows that you have no logical arguments to explain Obama's behavior on eligibility issue.

Obama is a coward - he can dish it out but cannot take it. Let me give you an example:
Obama won his first public office seat (Illinois State Senate) by clearing the field in the primaries. How did he do it? He went to the Court and challenged the eligibility of his opponents to qualify to be on the ballot. The claim was that not enogh properly filed voter endorsements have been collected by his opponents.
After winning the primary elections unopposed - he won the general elections in a heavily Dem. district.
We got an interesting situation here: It was possible for a lower court to sort out through thousands of election forms and determine which ones were not properly filed. It was done just in time (before elections) to clear the field for Obama, yet it is taking more than a year now to estanlish the birthplace for a single person in a far more important election.
I was not born yesterday to naively accept Obama's attempt to create an image of eligibility. He is not a natural born citizen, he knows it and is trying to hide the evidence from public.
If there is nothing to hide - present the evidence in court.

nosf41 says

Tell me what is irrational with this request?

Quite frankly, they're a waste of the President's time, and he's got a lot of shit to clean up. The lawsuits will never stop, so it's easier to just ignore them.

nosf41 says

My doubts are not based on any conspiracy theory - just on observation of his behavior, and some rational thinking.

Your thinking is not "rational". You refuse to accept statements provided by the state of Hawaii confirming the time and place of Obama's birth because you believe in the nutjob conspiracy theory that Hawaii officials can't be trusted. Based on that, it's obvious that people like you wouldn't accept anything short of seeing the original paper birth certificate in person (which ain't gonna happen -- you just aren't that important), so it's a huge waste of time to even bother responding to your pointless claims.

You're a kook, my friend. You are not a rational person with rational ideas, you are a conspiracy theorist and you exhibit all of the classical symptoms of such a person:

1. You believe claims made by people with highly questionable motives and backgrounds.
2. You refuse to accept evidence based on perceived flaws or claims of fraud
3. Even when presented with irrefutable evidence you find some other approach to complain about the same issue (and then you'll claim that the new issue was "the real problem" all along).

Do you also believe that Flouride was added to drinking water to save money for aluminum companies? That the moon landings were fake?

You probably believed in the "Clinton Body Count" too, didn't you? Shit, you probably believe in perpetual motion machines.

Kevin says

nosf41 says

Tell me what is irrational with this request?

Quite frankly, they’re a waste of the President’s time, and he’s got a lot of shit to clean up. The lawsuits will never stop, so it’s easier to just ignore them.
nosf41 says

My doubts are not based on any conspiracy theory - just on observation of his behavior, and some rational thinking.

Your thinking is not “rational”. You refuse to accept statements provided by the state of Hawaii confirming the time and place of Obama’s birth because you believe in the nutjob conspiracy theory that Hawaii officials can’t be trusted. Based on that, it’s obvious that people like you wouldn’t accept anything short of seeing the original paper birth certificate in person (which ain’t gonna happen — you just aren’t that important), so it’s a huge waste of time to even bother responding to your pointless claims.
You’re a kook, my friend. You are not a rational person with rational ideas, you are a conspiracy theorist and you exhibit all of the classical symptoms of such a person:
1. You believe claims made by people with highly questionable motives and backgrounds.
2. You refuse to accept evidence based on perceived flaws or claims of fraud
3. Even when presented with irrefutable evidence you find some other approach to complain about the same issue (and then you’ll claim that the new issue was “the real problem” all along).
Do you also believe that Flouride was added to drinking water to save money for aluminum companies? That the moon landings were fake?
You probably believed in the “Clinton Body Count” too, didn’t you? Shit, you probably believe in perpetual motion machines.

I don't believe any claims. We have seen public officials lie in the past.
I have no first hand knowledge of Obama's birthplace. All I can do is observe his words and his behavior on this issue.
What happened to the "transparency" promise?
I will trust the courts to examine Obama's birth certificate. I am sure they have good enough experts to check the validity of any document submitted by Obama. It is not going to happen because Obama has no proof - that is why he is fighting eligibility lawsuits. I have no other explanation for his behavior. It is a TRIVIAL issue to prove; asuming he was born in the USA. There is no need to post a document on a friendly web site. It proves nothng. Obama should have sent the same document to the court, if he thought it was good enough to prove his eligibility. His own legal team does not think so - hence they fight for the dismissal of eligibility lawsuits - an obvious contradiction to anyone but a blind faith Obama supporter.
None of the other questions you asked are related to this issue. It is a poor attempt to ridicule me by claiming something in my name. I have never used such tactic in this debate. Why do you feel need to continue debate in such tone?

bob2356 says

Why should anyone open their records. The state of Hawaii certified it. If this was not within the states normal procedures there would have been lawsuits all over. AP and CNN sent reporters to Indonesia and had no trouble seeing the schools or talking to teachers or former classmates. http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/22/obama.madrassa/
Oh right, CNN and AP are also part of the grand Obama conspiracy. I forgot.
What do you mean his records are sealed? No one’s school records are public information. Call up Harvard and ask for Bush’s records. I’m sure they will sent them right out to you. I don’t see where Obama is any more secretive than anyone else. I really don’t remember any past president posting his college records or birth certificate to the press. Please tell me which ones did. Actually could you scan them and post them here, I would be very interested in seeing that.
It wasn’t a rant, it was satire, look up what that means. Get a life.

A simple Google query on "Bush college records" will give you many links to check on his grades. Just one example:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/columnist/benedetto/2005-06-10-benedetto_x.htm

Try a similar search for Obama and see what you get.

A CNN and AP could do a story on Obama's birth hospital: Was it a Queens Hospital or Kapiolani or,...? Even Obama's web site was not sure either They first claimed Queens Hospital, then switched to Kapiolani. They could also tell us who the attending physician was.
I am sure that the birth hospital would not mind to be publicly honored of having delivered the future president of the USA.

This is a satire!? "...(yes you idiots Hawaii was a state for 2 years already when Obama was born)..."

There aren't any perpetual motion machines??? Really??? Next I suppose you're going to try to convince me the world is round.

No need to be paranoid nosf41, we really are laughing at you.